I would note that most of the cases reported for that drug involve trials that were intended to test the safety and benefits of that drug, not to establish its new cancer-causing potential . . .
As you might expect, the big companies, such as Gilead Sciences, Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb, have pushed aggressively for more market access to Sativex. Since its approval, Sativex has been available only to the states and to certain health plans to administer it.
While the medical establishment has moved away from drug approvals for so-called unproven methods of treatment, some people continue to try to block any possible use of a drug that has already been approved.
In January 2000, California voters approved Proposition 56 , which made it illegal for states or their political subdivisions to deny access to Sativex.
This was an attempt to block further testing of the drug for pediatric use. But there is a problem with the measure. A year after being approved by the state legislature, the California Academy of Family Physicians was able to convince the state to remove all clinical trials, including those intended to test the drug for pediatric use, from its list of required clinical trials. This move meant that patients in California who have tried the treatment without success can now still get it - the medical establishment could not just arbitrarily withdraw access from people who had not been able to get access in the preceding year.
Sativex supporters say this is bad for patient safety because the drug has been used to treat patients with cancer symptoms, but I don’t share their concern. I still think these trials are needed, given its long history, which makes getting the drug into the clinic much more difficult than if it were approved on its own.
Here’s a video about Sativex using its effect on cancer stem cells for which I have a copy of the medical literature (and a YouTube video) (Note : The link is an older version of “ The Sativex and Cancer Effect ,” which was written by Andrew Weil , a professor with a Ph.D. in biological chemistry at Johns Hopkins University) In his video, weil speaks of the Sativex effects on cancer stem cells (which he describes using a comparison to drugs such as chemotherapy and surgery) . . . .
Here’s an email I received from a reader in 2007 describing Sativex’s effect on the heart: I recently tried the same thing as you did on a 2-year-old baby with a heart murmur, to see exactly what it was going to do to their heart. The little boy’s heart stopped working and he felt short of breath (tears running down his cheeks), so I took him to urgent care. The pediatrician said he had a myocarditis, myocardial infarction, so he was in surgery. The whole operation was to fix a hole in his chest that was actually healing on its own. He had three surgeries: two to fix the hole in his chest, and the other to try to keep the cardiomyopathy down. The surgeon did the best he could in the absence of the Sativex and it worked wonders for him. However, one side of his heart never fully healed and the left side eventually stopped working. We all know that the human body is hard to take care of, and the surgery could have been done at home instead of in the operating room. My husband and I are very saddened by the fact that the surgery could have been done at home. It would have saved this child’s life, but it definitely could have saved his. I’ve tried this method before with similar results, and it does help with some children. We all know that some medical treatment seems to help some people, and this seems to be exactly that. I’ll add that the doctors were concerned about complications in the children - they were worried that the drug would make the child so dizzy that they would accidentally fall out of the bed. That, and the potential side effects. The doctors had heard of other drugs that make children feel dizzy and dizzy children who have had strokes and heart attacks; one of them (Zocor) even used “dysglycemia” as a label for it . . . .
In 2010 , David Gorski made a series of posts on his Blog about how Sativex is used to treat children with epilepsy and autism, and about how he has studied all of the various ways it is being used on children, but he has not been able to find any peer-reviewed studies that compare it to treatments designed or approved for adults and children. For the same reason, Gorski has never been able to find a peer-reviewed study that compares the results of Sativex to other treatments for adults and children. Gorski’s posts are also about Sativex being used to treat various problems to animals, with no direct comparisons to adult and pediatric issues. So far, I have not found any peer-reviewed studies examining the efficacy of the drug